Posterior Approach for Spinal Accessory to Suprascapular Nerve Transfer

2021 ◽  
pp. 261-265
Author(s):  
Nikhil K. Murthy ◽  
Robert J. Spinner
2021 ◽  
pp. 175319342110396
Author(s):  
Dominic M. Power ◽  
Devanshi Jimulia ◽  
Paul Malone ◽  
Colin Shirley ◽  
Tahseen Chaudhry

The spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve transfer is a key procedure for restoring shoulder function in upper brachial plexus injuries and is typically undertaken via an anterior approach. The anterior approach may miss injury to the suprascapular nerve about the suprascapular notch, which may explain why functional outcomes are often limited. In 2014 we adopted a posterior approach to enable better visualization of the suprascapular nerve at the notch. Over the next 6 years we have used this approach for 20 explorations after high-energy trauma. In 7/20 we identified abnormalities at the level of the suprascapular ligament, which we would not have identified with an anterior approach: there were two ruptures, two neuromas-in-continuity and three cases of scar encasement, necessitating neurolysis. Nerve transfer could be undertaken distal to the suprascapular notch, bypassing the site of injury. These pathological findings support the wider adoption of the posterior approach in cases of high-energy trauma. Level of evidence: IV


2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (08) ◽  
pp. 592-595
Author(s):  
Marc Seifman ◽  
Scott Ferris

Background Optimal dynamic reconstruction of shoulder function requires a functional suprascapular nerve (SSN). Nerve transfer of the distal spinal accessory nerve (dSAN) to the SSN will in many cases restore very good supraspinatus and infraspinatus function. One potential cause of failure of this nerve transfer is an unrecognized more distal injury of the SSN. An anterior approach to this transfer does not allow for visualization of the nerve at the scapular notch which is a disadvantage when compared with a posterior approach to the SSN. Methods All patients of the senior author (S.F.) with traumatic brachial plexus injuries undergoing spinal accessory nerve to SSN transfer via the posterior approach were analyzed. Results Of the 58 patients, 11 (19.0%) demonstrated abnormal findings at the notch. In two of these 11 patients (18.2%), reconstruction was abandoned due to severe injury of the nerve. There was a higher rate of clavicular fractures in patients with SSN injuries at the notch, compared with no SSN injury at the notch (63.6 vs. 12.8%). Conclusion The dSAN to SSN transfer is a reliable reconstruction for restoration of shoulder external rotation and abduction. There is a high proportion of injuries to the nerve at the notch, which can be best appreciated from a posterior approach. The authors, therefore, advocate a posterior approach for this nerve transfer.


2010 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
PS Bhandari ◽  
LP Sadhotra ◽  
P Bhargava ◽  
Manmohan Singh ◽  
MK Mukherjee ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 140-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Pruksakorn ◽  
K. Sananpanich ◽  
S. Khunamornpong ◽  
S. Phudhichareonrat ◽  
P. Chalidapong

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (07) ◽  
pp. 1442-1447
Author(s):  
Husnain Khan ◽  
Muhammad Shafique ◽  
Zahid Iqbal Bhatti ◽  
Tehseen Ahmad Cheema

Adult brachial plexus injury is a now a common problem due to high incidence of motorbike accidents. Among all types, C 5 and C6 (upper brachial plexus injury) is the most common. If the patient present within 6 months then nerve transfer is the preferred treatment. However, there are different options for nerve transfer and different approaches for surgery. Objectives: The objective of the study was to share our experience of nerve transfer close to target muscles in upper brachial plexus injury. Study Design: Quaisi experimental study. Setting: National Orthopaedic Hospital, Bahawalpur. Period: January 2015 to June 2018. Material & Methods: Total 32 patients were operated with isolated C5 and C6 injury. In all patients four nerve transfers were done. For shoulder abduction posterior approach was used and accessory to suprascapular nerve and one of motor branch of radial to axillary nerve were transferred. Modified Oberlin transfer was done for elbow flexion. Both shoulder abduction and elbow flexion was graded according to medical research council grading system. Results: After one year follow up more than 75% of the patients showed good to normal shoulder abduction and 87.50% showed good to normal elbow flexion. Residual Median nerve damage was noted only in two patients (6.25%). Conclusion: If there is no evidence of recovery up to three months early nerve transfer should be considered, ideal time is 3-6 months. Nerve transfer close to target muscle yields superior results. The shoulder stabilizers and abductors should ideally be innervated by double nerve transfer through posterior approach. Similarly double fascicular transfer (modified Oberlin) should be done for elbow flexion.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document